Moon anomalies Apollo 16 Crew Photos

They used Hasselblad cameras on the Moon medium format so large negative size and also some of the best lenses available. The colour helps it stand
out apart from that using your theory how would they know that small object was there to land close to it, talk about clutching at straws.

Oh I’m familiar with their cameras, not sure what you mean though, OPs anamoly and the small orange marker pics differ wildly in color and size for
such a consistent camera, no?

You know there were tons of satellite fly by missions prior to Apollo 11 mapping the areas, not to mention Apollo 8’s manned orbit, right? (Re your
straws

Apollo 8 didn't cover Apollo 16's landing site, though Apollos 12 and 14 did. Neither these nor the Lunar Orbiter probes had the kind of camera needed
to spot a tiny orange marker from orbit (even a modern camera wouldn't), and the best image of Apollo 16's site from Lunar Orbiter (frame H3 here
www.lpi.usra.edu... ) does not give anything like the detail shown in the Apollo record. See my page here for
details of that onebigmonkey.com...

It's the out of focus orange marker for the geophone exactly where it is recorded as being sticking out like a sore thumb against a monochrome
background.

The digital versions of the images have been colour-balanced, so that might be the reason for a slight colour discrepancy in that marker. You can find
unaltered scans at Flickr, like this one.

A full-scale crop from that image:

As has been pointed out, the location of the "red flag" corresponds to the location of geophone 3 and its marker:
www.hq.nasa.gov... I even found the instructions for its deployment:
www.hq.nasa.gov...

Here's a close up of the area in question that I've adjusted to make things a little clearer

On the left you can see the ALSEP central station, and you can also see the orange marker of the geophone line. Over on the right is the mortar
assembly used with the geophone to carry out the seismic experiment. Attached to the mortar is (wait for it) a bright orange square flag on a tall
pole that would allow it to stand proud of the horizon.

Apollo 14 used a similar set up, and you can see it in this image

The reason it isn't visible on many of the images is mostly because photos of the ALSEP equipment from up close are angled downwards so the flag isn't
visible, but you can see the pole in photos of the mortar, and in this one

You're glad that there isn't a huge tower on the Moon that was concealed for 45 years?

I'm just glad we figured out which of the Apollo equipment this was. I got a bit too lazy settling down on the geophone marker (although it was too
low to the ground and wrong colour), so big kudos to the monkey for trawling the images and finding it.

Here's a close up of the area in question that I've adjusted to make things a little clearer

On the left you can see the ALSEP central station, and you can also see the orange marker of the geophone line. Over on the right is the mortar
assembly used with the geophone to carry out the seismic experiment. Attached to the mortar is (wait for it) a bright orange square flag on a tall
pole that would allow it to stand proud of the horizon.

Apollo 14 used a similar set up, and you can see it in this image

The reason it isn't visible on many of the images is mostly because photos of the ALSEP equipment from up close are angled downwards so the flag isn't
visible, but you can see the pole in photos of the mortar, and in this one

The question of potential artifacts in Apollo imagery is worth confronting with serious analysis.

Here is another report on similar claims, including a claim that an Apollo solar wind collector in one photo was actual an alien tower on the horizon.
I hope it identifies resources and methods useful to everybody the next time such a claim appears [and there be a next time].

I think the thread has been a salutary lesson in avoiding the pitfalls of the 'rush to judgement'.

There is an assumption by many that anything unusual, or not immediately identifiable, in an Apollo image is automatically a 'UFO' or some sort of
accidental disclosure of a hitherto secret artifact of human or alien origin. I'm not saying this is what the OP did, but it's a common theme on this
and many other fora that deal with the subject by those with a predisposition towards the idea that aliens walk among us, NASA hides stuff and the
moon is just loaded with goodies left by ET.

As someone who who believes in the Apollo missions, based not on blind faith but an above average knowledge of the subject material, I also made an
a priori judgement: this was a obviously a piece of Apollo hardware. Having decided this is what it was I then latched on the first piece of
equipment that seemed to fit the bill, happily ignoring the protestations of people who rightly pointed out the inconsistencies with the equipment in
terms of its size, shape and prominence over the horizon. Had those objectors not persisted, we would all have walked away with only a partially
correct answer.

As important as avoiding the rush to judgement and reaching for the off switch thinking you're done is the need to admit when you have made a mistake.
If more people did that humanity would progress further

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.